Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2022, 02:40:23 AM *
News: Reminder: do not keep your money in online accounts
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
1  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Mt.Gox AML/KYC Process Explained on: May 16, 2013, 09:35:15 AM
So what is the deal with straight btc withdrawals now?  Do I have to submit personal data to get my coins out?


2  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Mt. Gox Dwolla account frozen by DHS on: May 16, 2013, 09:26:11 AM
DHS are a bunch of fuckturd Nazis. Any idea how much they stole?

I'm going to say this in public for the simple reason that I'm kind of afraid to:

Yes.  Fuckturd Nazis.  I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years, and I've seen many random acts of fascism, but this is the only time I've ever been stone cold robbed by the federal government.  What does that mean?  I don't think we're marching toward total dictatorship any faster than we have been since the 18th century.  But I do think that this DHS thing is a really really bad idea.  Too much power.  Too vague a mandate.  It's very name sets of alarm bells, and it's actions set off more.   
3  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Mt. Gox Dwolla account frozen by DHS on: May 16, 2013, 09:05:03 AM
BTC withdrawals appear to not be working at Mt. Gox either. Decided to get out of Mt. Gox until this blows over...looks like I have no way to do that at the moment...

Same here.  I can't get my meagre holdings out of mt.gox and they want my dox.  I'm guessing I should write my bitcoins off.

Anyone have any more information about this? 

4  Economy / Economics / Re: Regression theorem & Bitcoin revisited on: February 14, 2013, 10:51:42 PM

This is a cost, not a value.
But, maybe, it could be interpreted as a "direct use value".

If instead of asking "what is the direct use value of bitcoin" we ask "what is the direct use value of a Proof of Work" we could be on something.

The direct use value of a proof of work is the knowledge the work needed limit the output of the proves offered.


The idea is that Bitcoin is a proof-of-work token using the same protocol as Hashcash ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash ) which itself is/was a scheme for limiting spam, wherein inclusion of the Hashcash token would cost the user something (CPU time).  Individual emails would be cheap to send, but mass emails would be expensive.  Under this system, email receivers could dismiss email that included no POW tokens, and senders would thereby be required to include them. 

In other words, you would not be able to get an email through without the token... you would need them in order to send email.  (Also, most users would not find it convenient to generate these tokens on their own.  They would prefer to buy the tokens from a producer.)  This is the pre-existing commodity value of the tokens, that they are a necessity, or have a real-world utility, as tokens that legitimize email.



5  Economy / Economics / Re: Regression theorem & Bitcoin revisited on: February 14, 2013, 11:38:01 AM
What _can_ you use bitcoins for, other than exchange?

Quote
The most widely known and used proof-of-work is the hashcash cost-function which is used by Bitcoin, and also some anti-spam systems and as an anti-DoS mechanism in a number of other protocols. In the context of anti-spam, a proof of work on the recipients address can be attached to the email in an email header. Legitimate senders will be able to do the work to generate the proof easily (not much work is required for a single email), but mass spam emailers will have difficulty generating the required proofs (which would require huge computational resources).

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

This is the "pre-existing commodity value" of Bitcoin.

6  Economy / Economics / Re: Regression theorem & Bitcoin revisited on: January 29, 2013, 11:19:21 PM
But the regression theorem requires that the money have value each prior day, even when you get all the way back to the day before the moneystuff became money. Hence the need for an intrinsic value.

I thought the regression theorem came from economists who do not believe in intrinsic value and believe that all value is subjective.  I think you may be mixing and matching incompatible economic concepts.

I agree with this.  I can't see how the term intrinsic value even makes any sense in this conversation.
7  Economy / Economics / Re: Regression theorem & Bitcoin revisited on: January 20, 2013, 02:06:23 AM


That was a long shot. Do you really need there to be intrinsic value in bitcoins?

If bitcoin is to fit the regression theorem, then yes bitcoin would need to have an intrinsic, or more accurately, a barterable value.

This discussion isn't really about bitcoin, though, is it?  Bitcoin clearly has a value and clearly has utility as a money.  This discussion, I think, is really about the validity of the regression theorem.  Because if bitcoin doesn't fit the theorem, then the theorem is disproven.

As for whether my point is a long shot, it isn't.  It's exactly dead on.  That's why I'm surprised that the point never comes up.  It's impressive that Satoshi saw the barterability of proof-of-work tokens and jumped right from there to turning them into money.  To understand both cryptography and economics enough to see this possibility and actually implement it is a stroke of genius.

8  Economy / Economics / Re: Regression theorem & Bitcoin revisited on: January 19, 2013, 11:42:21 PM
This never seems to come up in these regression theorem discussions:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

Quote
The most widely known and used proof-of-work is the hashcash cost-function which is used by Bitcoin, and also some anti-spam systems and as an anti-DoS mechanism in a number of other protocols. In the context of anti-spam, a proof of work on the recipients address can be attached to the email in an email header. Legitimate senders will be able to do the work to generate the proof easily (not much work is required for a single email), but mass spam emailers will have difficulty generating the required proofs (which would require huge computational resources).


So, the proof-of-work token is originally valuable because it lets you send email, and because it is also divisible fungible and countable it inevitably gets used as money. 

9  Economy / Goods / Re: Silver In Various Forms BELOW SPOT! on: November 28, 2012, 02:06:03 AM
90% Silver Kennedy Halves were only made in 1964. Before that it was the Franklin Halves, also 90%.
From 1965-1972, Kennedy Halves were made of 40% Silver.

Hey what's up with that ingot?  Is it hand-poured?  At first I thought you said you made it yourself, but then I went back and reread.

It sounds kind of funky.  I'm curious.  Pics?
10  Economy / Goods / Re: Silver In Various Forms BELOW SPOT! on: November 23, 2012, 10:29:53 PM
I have dimes, quarters, and a ton of '64-'72 Kennedy Halves (40% Silver), war nickels (40% Silver) and my almost 2 ounce 92.5+% ingot.

Your '64 Kennedy halves are 90% silver, I think.
11  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Building a Bitcoin ATM. Should I bother? Demo Video! on: November 22, 2012, 06:54:27 PM
Wasn't someone working on a BTC ATM about a year or two ago (it was a USD version, not a EUR version)?  What ever became of that?

Someone ought to help OP out with a link to that project so OP doesn't have to reinvent any wheels.
12  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Could this word to store a wallet key? on: November 18, 2012, 03:09:45 PM
Like I mentioned before, I don't completely understand all the tech involved (more on the BTC side than the NFC) but I think there's a serious opportunity here for someone.

More physicality would really be a benefit for BTC.  The ability to literally toss BTC onto a countertop in exchange for goods and services would accelerate adoption.  NFC could be used (it seems) to load, read and unload chits in a convenient way.

All that's really necessary, in my partially informed view, is a low-cost reader.  Something like a plastic mat with an NFC coil in it. 

The chits might also be made to restrict themselves to specific amounts of bitcoins, and broadcast a simple on/off signal to verify that they are loaded. (Example: a 5 BTC chit has a '5' engraved on the outside.  You put the chit on the mat and the cashier immediately sees whether the chit is full or empty.)  This way the chits can be traded back and forth as physical currency until someone needs to unload them for whatever reason.  Conceivably, the NFC could also power a color-change in the chit for visual inspection. 

Or something like that.  My point is that there seems to be some potential in NFC for bitcoins, and I wouldn't mind knowing that someone is working on it.
13  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Could this word to store a wallet key? on: November 16, 2012, 11:39:31 PM
This is kinda over my head, but maybe this youtube video might give you some ideas:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GklBmrx2jJI

14  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Wikipedia: "Some criticize Bitcoin for being a Ponzi scheme..." on: November 13, 2012, 03:14:16 AM
I just added a comment with suggested text and footnote.  The citation isn't perfectly formatted, but it's a step anyway.

Also, the original sentence under scrutiny ought to be fixed for it's broken link and weasel words, but I'm not going to continue in the discussion because it was a nightmare just leaving that one comment. 

15  Economy / Economics / Re: What is Money? on: November 13, 2012, 01:35:54 AM
Can't you say that Bitcoin's non-monetary value stems from it's relationship to the proof-of-work antispam scheme that first inspired it?  Satoshi saw that proof-of-work tokens could eventually become money, and decided to cut to the chase.


Also, this article is relevant to the subject at hand:

Halloween and Its Candy Economy

Mises Daily: Saturday, October 31, 2009 by Jeffrey A. Tucker
http://mises.org/daily/3834

There's an audio version out there somewhere.  All I can find is the text, though.
16  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Wikipedia: "Some criticize Bitcoin for being a Ponzi scheme..." on: November 13, 2012, 01:21:28 AM
Holy crap.  I'm reading through the talk page for the Bitcoin article and that sudoghost guy is being a willfull pain in the ass. 

"It does not matter that it has been refuted, the article does not present it as a fact but reflects that sources have criticized this,"

If it's not presented as a fact, what's it doing there?  It's supposed to be an encyclopedia.  I'm pretty sure that's part of the Wikipedia thing... to be encyclopedic.  Not to add the criticisms of every tom dick and harry to every single article. 

If he's claiming that the Register and Reuters quotes are sufficient sourcing to keep the sentence in, then I think he's wrong.  Neither quote directly makes the Ponzi criticism, but instead continue the assertion that some unnamed person or persons have criticized.  At some point good sourcing means that someone with an actual name is going to have to say with their mouth or keyboard that Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme, or even just has the characteristics of a Ponzi scheme.

(Which last phrase--"having the characteristics of a Ponzi scheme"--is just more weasling.  You can't stack weasle statements in hopes of building a strong assertion.  Either say it or don't.)

Honestly, there must be some good source out there that makes the case that Bitcoin is Ponziesque.  Why doesn't he go off and find it rather than digging in fighting this thing?  Seriously, be constructive.

 
17  Economy / Goods / More 90% silver Franklin halves, escrowed Bitmit auctions on: November 12, 2012, 07:55:57 PM
Hello,

I just put up three $1-face-value lots of 90% silver Franklin half dollars.  The bidding starts at 0.5 BTC.  

Also, there are still two lots of Washington quarters (90% silver, $1 FV) with no bids on them.  These could conceivably go for less than melt value.

These are escrowed auctions at Bitmit.

https://www.bitmit.net/en/user/zenoizen

You can look at my feedback on these other sites if you care to:

http://myworld.ebay.com/hollowtreeetc
http://www.etsy.com/people/zenoizen/feedback
http://www.bitcoinfeedback.com/viewuser.php?un=Longmarch&id=13
18  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I wrote an intro to bitcoins. Want you opinions on it. on: November 11, 2012, 12:20:42 PM

Plus spell-check...

Yes... Relativily -> Relatively
19  Economy / Goods / Re: [WTS] Silver: Franklin Halves in $1 FV lots, @ Bitmit on: November 09, 2012, 12:18:32 PM
Bumping with two lots added and shipping info.
20  Economy / Goods / Re: [WTS] Silver: Franklin Halves in $1 FV lots, @ Bitmit on: November 07, 2012, 11:50:19 PM
Latest info is in the above post.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!